Very OT, size of PDF files.

[Guest mm]

Don't know where else to discuss this, because afaik there id no adobe

or pdf newsgroup.

 

I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the owners

manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

 

Looking for later software, I went to their website and downloaded the

manual, which was 2 megs.

 

Strangely, they look identical, each 68 pages, and when I alt-tab from

one to the other in Acrobat, I can't see any difference in quality.

 

Anyone have experience with this.

 

 

 

If you are inclined to email me

for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)

[Guest Mart]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

Maybe worth looking at each the .pdf file's Properties in Adobe Reader (File

| Properties) to see if that tells you anything different about them

 

Mart

 

 

"mm" <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote in message

news:5a8er3tp03crph6df0f5hj4nhd94k78k8s@4ax.com...

> Don't know where else to discuss this, because afaik there id no adobe

> or pdf newsgroup.

>

> I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the owners

> manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

>

> Looking for later software, I went to their website and downloaded the

> manual, which was 2 megs.

>

> Strangely, they look identical, each 68 pages, and when I alt-tab from

> one to the other in Acrobat, I can't see any difference in quality.

>

> Anyone have experience with this.

>

>

>

> If you are inclined to email me

> for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)

[Guest Gary S. Terhune]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

PDF, like JPG files, are variably compressible. One of your copies got

compressed more than the other. May or may not affect the quality of the

file.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://www.grystmill.com

 

"mm" <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote in message

news:5a8er3tp03crph6df0f5hj4nhd94k78k8s@4ax.com...

> Don't know where else to discuss this, because afaik there id no adobe

> or pdf newsgroup.

>

> I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the owners

> manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

>

> Looking for later software, I went to their website and downloaded the

> manual, which was 2 megs.

>

> Strangely, they look identical, each 68 pages, and when I alt-tab from

> one to the other in Acrobat, I can't see any difference in quality.

>

> Anyone have experience with this.

>

>

>

> If you are inclined to email me

> for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)

[Guest thanatoid]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

mm <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote in

news:5a8er3tp03crph6df0f5hj4nhd94k78k8s@4ax.com:

> Don't know where else to discuss this, because afaik there

> id no adobe or pdf newsgroup.

 

There is a pdf group, and there is an adobe acrobat group. How

popular they are is another matter. Most huge software makers

have very extensive forums on their site, Adobe probably being

no exception. You can discuss it there.

> I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the

> owners manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

>

> Looking for later software, I went to their website and

> downloaded the manual, which was 2 megs.

>

> Strangely, they look identical, each 68 pages, and when I

> alt-tab from one to the other in Acrobat, I can't see any

> difference in quality.

>

> Anyone have experience with this.

 

1. Does it REALLY matter? PDF is an amazing format, just be

grateful Adobe almost redeemed its countless sins by giving it

to us.

 

2. Check the graphics. The resolution may be very different.

 

3. Although the basic concept behind the format remains the

same, improvements are made all the time (unfortunately

resulting in program bloat). The much smaller file on the site

may just be an example of that. And did you REALLY check it ALL,

paragraph by paragraph and graphic by graphic? Using the same

zoom factor?

 

--

"As you know, it is considered bad form to discuss the latest

news with persons from the beyond."

Karel Capek

[Guest MEB]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

 

 

"mm" <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote in message

news:5a8er3tp03crph6df0f5hj4nhd94k78k8s@4ax.com...

| Don't know where else to discuss this, because afaik there id no adobe

| or pdf newsgroup.

|

| I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the owners

| manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

|

| Looking for later software, I went to their website and downloaded the

| manual, which was 2 megs.

|

| Strangely, they look identical, each 68 pages, and when I alt-tab from

| one to the other in Acrobat, I can't see any difference in quality.

|

| Anyone have experience with this.

|

|

|

| If you are inclined to email me

| for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)

 

As has been stated elsewhere, the PDF format can be prepared for various

presentations, one being for say a CD manual with high quality full spectrum

and size color pictures and maxed pixels per inch/centimeter type/font, and

a web presentation which uses lower quality [and usually smaller] images

and type. Its really difficult to tell much of a difference when properly

prepared by the PDF creation application [which does that modification

during the creation format], and viewed on your desktop/monitor.. Were you

perhaps to expand those two different sized PDFs to say, a wall sized

presentation [or a 24 inch or larger display], then the differing quality

would likely be markedly noticeable.

 

--

 

MEB

http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

_________

[Guest mm]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 17:10:30 -0500, "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com>

wrote:

>

>

>"mm" <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote in message

>news:5a8er3tp03crph6df0f5hj4nhd94k78k8s@4ax.com...

>| Don't know where else to discuss this, because afaik there id no adobe

>| or pdf newsgroup.

>|

>| I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the owners

>| manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

>|

>| Looking for later software, I went to their website and downloaded the

>| manual, which was 2 megs.

>|

>| Strangely, they look identical, each 68 pages, and when I alt-tab from

>| one to the other in Acrobat, I can't see any difference in quality.

>|

>| Anyone have experience with this.

>|

To Thanatoid, No, I didn't zoom in more than I normally do.

>

> As has been stated elsewhere, the PDF format can be prepared for various

>presentations, one being for say a CD manual with high quality full spectrum

>and size color pictures and maxed pixels per inch/centimeter type/font, and

>a web presentation which uses lower quality [and usually smaller] images

>and type. Its really difficult to tell much of a difference when properly

>prepared by the PDF creation application [which does that modification

>during the creation format], and viewed on your desktop/monitor.. Were you

>perhaps to expand those two different sized PDFs to say, a wall sized

>presentation [or a 24 inch or larger display], then the differing quality

>would likely be markedly noticeable.

 

Thanks to all of you. I'm cutting away the case of my monitor in a

few minutes to enlarge it to 24 inches, for testing your suggestion,

so I wanted to write before I have to go off-line.

 

If you are inclined to email me

for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)

[Guest MEB]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

hehe, okay, so you've never done a presentation like that.. got it... oh,

make sure those corners are square when you cut that monitor apart:)

 

I suppose I should add another potential to the mix, there may be

additional inclusions which you have yet to use or locate in the larger PDF,

such as enhanced help, Java script or other...

 

--

 

MEB

http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

_________

 

 

"mm" <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote in message

news:t4ser3pp4q01cr41sj2kuakeq7oqk90ork@4ax.com...

| On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 17:10:30 -0500, "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com>

| wrote:

|

| >

| >

| >"mm" <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote in message

| >news:5a8er3tp03crph6df0f5hj4nhd94k78k8s@4ax.com...

| >| Don't know where else to discuss this, because afaik there id no adobe

| >| or pdf newsgroup.

| >|

| >| I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the owners

| >| manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

| >|

| >| Looking for later software, I went to their website and downloaded the

| >| manual, which was 2 megs.

| >|

| >| Strangely, they look identical, each 68 pages, and when I alt-tab from

| >| one to the other in Acrobat, I can't see any difference in quality.

| >|

| >| Anyone have experience with this.

| >|

| To Thanatoid, No, I didn't zoom in more than I normally do.

| >

| > As has been stated elsewhere, the PDF format can be prepared for various

| >presentations, one being for say a CD manual with high quality full

spectrum

| >and size color pictures and maxed pixels per inch/centimeter type/font,

and

| >a web presentation which uses lower quality [and usually smaller] images

| >and type. Its really difficult to tell much of a difference when properly

| >prepared by the PDF creation application [which does that modification

| >during the creation format], and viewed on your desktop/monitor.. Were

you

| >perhaps to expand those two different sized PDFs to say, a wall sized

| >presentation [or a 24 inch or larger display], then the differing quality

| >would likely be markedly noticeable.

|

| Thanks to all of you. I'm cutting away the case of my monitor in a

| few minutes to enlarge it to 24 inches, for testing your suggestion,

| so I wanted to write before I have to go off-line.

|

| If you are inclined to email me

| for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)

[Guest Gary S. Terhune]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

All kinds of embedded crap... PDFs are *much* worse than JPGs... Worse than

anything I can think of. You just rake up the contents of the desk (the

"project"), pack it all into a box and squeeze hard.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://www.grystmill.com

 

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:%23LcxlMQcIHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> hehe, okay, so you've never done a presentation like that.. got it... oh,

> make sure those corners are square when you cut that monitor apart:)

>

> I suppose I should add another potential to the mix, there may be

> additional inclusions which you have yet to use or locate in the larger

> PDF,

> such as enhanced help, Java script or other...

>

> --

>

> MEB

> http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

> _________

>

>

> "mm" <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote in message

> news:t4ser3pp4q01cr41sj2kuakeq7oqk90ork@4ax.com...

> | On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 17:10:30 -0500, "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com>

> | wrote:

> |

> | >

> | >

> | >"mm" <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote in message

> | >news:5a8er3tp03crph6df0f5hj4nhd94k78k8s@4ax.com...

> | >| Don't know where else to discuss this, because afaik there id no

> adobe

> | >| or pdf newsgroup.

> | >|

> | >| I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the owners

> | >| manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

> | >|

> | >| Looking for later software, I went to their website and downloaded

> the

> | >| manual, which was 2 megs.

> | >|

> | >| Strangely, they look identical, each 68 pages, and when I alt-tab

> from

> | >| one to the other in Acrobat, I can't see any difference in quality.

> | >|

> | >| Anyone have experience with this.

> | >|

> | To Thanatoid, No, I didn't zoom in more than I normally do.

> | >

> | > As has been stated elsewhere, the PDF format can be prepared for

> various

> | >presentations, one being for say a CD manual with high quality full

> spectrum

> | >and size color pictures and maxed pixels per inch/centimeter type/font,

> and

> | >a web presentation which uses lower quality [and usually smaller]

> images

> | >and type. Its really difficult to tell much of a difference when

> properly

> | >prepared by the PDF creation application [which does that modification

> | >during the creation format], and viewed on your desktop/monitor.. Were

> you

> | >perhaps to expand those two different sized PDFs to say, a wall sized

> | >presentation [or a 24 inch or larger display], then the differing

> quality

> | >would likely be markedly noticeable.

> |

> | Thanks to all of you. I'm cutting away the case of my monitor in a

> | few minutes to enlarge it to 24 inches, for testing your suggestion,

> | so I wanted to write before I have to go off-line.

> |

> | If you are inclined to email me

> | for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)

>

>

[Guest thanatoid]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in

news:OkNeVwWcIHA.5208@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:

> All kinds of embedded crap... PDFs are *much* worse than

> JPGs... Worse than anything I can think of. You just rake

> up the contents of the desk (the "project"), pack it all

> into a box and squeeze hard.

 

Do you have ANY idea of what the PDF format is actually about

and how it is constructed? To even compare it to a JPG is beyond

absurd.

 

I know everyone, myself included, occasionally talks about

things we shouldn't, but one really should at least have a hint

of a shadow of a clue before opening one's mouth.

 

You know I tend to be slightly, shall we say, ehm, cynical about

things, let alone companies like Adobe (and MS ;-) but PDF is a

brilliant invention that never ceases to astound me and you

should read up a little on it instead of saying really stupid

things.

 

I stopped using Acrobat ages ago because of the ridiculous bloat

and clunkiness. I use FoxIt Reader. But I am talking about the

FORMAT here, and feel that it is possibly Adobe's greatest

contribution.

 

 

 

--

"As you know, it is considered bad form to discuss the latest

news with persons from the beyond."

Karel Capek

[Guest Franc Zabkar]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:48:25 -0500, mm <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> put

finger to keyboard and composed:

>Don't know where else to discuss this, because afaik there id no adobe

>or pdf newsgroup.

>

>I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the owners

>manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

>

>Looking for later software, I went to their website and downloaded the

>manual, which was 2 megs.

>

>Strangely, they look identical, each 68 pages, and when I alt-tab from

>one to the other in Acrobat, I can't see any difference in quality.

>

>Anyone have experience with this.

 

Some PDFs are text documents, others are scanned documents. The latter

are much larger. You can easily determine which format you have by

clicking Select Text or Select Image and then trying to drag a box

around some portion of the document. I don't know if this accounts for

your observations, though.

 

You may find this reference helpful:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_document_format

 

- Franc Zabkar

--

Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

[Guest Franc Zabkar]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:48:25 -0500, mm <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> put

finger to keyboard and composed:

>I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the owners

>manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

>

>Looking for later software, I went to their website and downloaded the

>manual, which was 2 megs.

 

Just to put things in perspective, here is the King James Bible, a

text document, in various formats.

 

http://www.1337bible.com/Bible/kjv12.zip (1.4MB)

 

http://patriotnet/users/bmcgin/kjv12.txt (4.8MB)

 

http://www.davince.com/download/kjvbible.pdf (2.6MB)

 

Obviously the PDF format is compressed (in this example), but not as

much as the ZIP format.

 

- Franc Zabkar

--

Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

[Guest Gary S. Terhune]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

PDF compression and ZIP compression aren't really similar. Like JPG, PDF

compression looks at the objects it contains -- text, images, fonts, TOC

(with thumbnails or not), and a bunch of other stuff you can put into a PDF

package. Many of those objects can be compressed or not, using lossy

algorithms that aren't applied to generic compression.. But whether you

compress those items or not, the entire package can then be compressed using

generic methods like those of WinZip, etc. The wealth of possibilities means

that you seldom end up with the same exact size, or even approximately the

same place.

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://www.grystmill.com

 

 

You seem to think that comparable amounts or text

"Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> wrote in message

news:1bojr3t2i437eeq8n04eg0ue4ibnf4vha5@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:48:25 -0500, mm <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> put

> finger to keyboard and composed:

>

>>I bought something that came with a CD and on it was the owners

>>manual, which was a 9 meg pdf file.

>>

>>Looking for later software, I went to their website and downloaded the

>>manual, which was 2 megs.

>

> Just to put things in perspective, here is the King James Bible, a

> text document, in various formats.

>

> http://www.1337bible.com/Bible/kjv12.zip (1.4MB)

>

> http://patriotnet/users/bmcgin/kjv12.txt (4.8MB)

>

> http://www.davince.com/download/kjvbible.pdf (2.6MB)

>

> Obviously the PDF format is compressed (in this example), but not as

> much as the ZIP format.

>

> - Franc Zabkar

> --

> Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

[Guest thanatoid]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in

news:O3etEtwcIHA.4800@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:

> PDF compression and ZIP compression aren't really similar.

 

<SNIP>

 

Gary, stop embarrassing yourself and read up on the PDF format.

Even the Wikipedia entry should give you some idea. Read it

twice if necessary.

 

 

--

WARNING!!! "thanatoid" is not a real being and in particular

is missing key components that result in his not being human at

all. He has exhibited plenty of anti-human behavior in these

groups. Agree with him on specific issues if you must, but don't

fall into the trap of thinking he's a "kindred spirit". He WILL

turn on you and injury may result.

 

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://www.grystmill.com

 

(Gary appears regularly on

microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion. Spelling errors

corrected. Permission to use requested and ignored, interpreted

as indifference. t.)

[Guest Franc Zabkar]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 07:22:55 -0800, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> put

finger to keyboard and composed:

>PDF compression and ZIP compression aren't really similar. Like JPG, PDF

>compression looks at the objects it contains -- text, images, fonts, TOC

>(with thumbnails or not), and a bunch of other stuff you can put into a PDF

>package. Many of those objects can be compressed or not, using lossy

>algorithms that aren't applied to generic compression.. But whether you

>compress those items or not, the entire package can then be compressed using

>generic methods like those of WinZip, etc. The wealth of possibilities means

>that you seldom end up with the same exact size, or even approximately the

>same place.

 

Perhaps compressing the OP's two PDFs may reveal something about their

content. If we simplify things by assuming that the documents contain

compressible text and incompressible graphics, plus overhead, then one

would expect that the majority of the content would be graphical. If

so, then ZIPping the PDF files should not dramatically decrease their

sizes. It would be interesting if the files decreased in size by a

similar absolute amount. This would suggest that they had the same

amount of text content.

 

- Franc Zabkar

--

Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

[Guest Gary S. Terhune]

Re: Very OT, size of PDF files.

 

Can't assume any such thing. I can take the same text-only document and,

using WinZip,create all kinds of different sized compressed files, based

upon the amount of compression chosen. In the case at hand, it makes more

sense to compress PDFs little or at all when storing on a CD. The more the

compression, the longer it takes to read. Whereas web download suggests you

want max compression.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://www.grystmill.com

 

"Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> wrote in message

news:jevor3p07aqcfsena828jgf3ug4fk03o9h@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 07:22:55 -0800, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> put

> finger to keyboard and composed:

>

>>PDF compression and ZIP compression aren't really similar. Like JPG, PDF

>>compression looks at the objects it contains -- text, images, fonts, TOC

>>(with thumbnails or not), and a bunch of other stuff you can put into a

>>PDF

>>package. Many of those objects can be compressed or not, using lossy

>>algorithms that aren't applied to generic compression.. But whether you

>>compress those items or not, the entire package can then be compressed

>>using

>>generic methods like those of WinZip, etc. The wealth of possibilities

>>means

>>that you seldom end up with the same exact size, or even approximately the

>>same place.

>

> Perhaps compressing the OP's two PDFs may reveal something about their

> content. If we simplify things by assuming that the documents contain

> compressible text and incompressible graphics, plus overhead, then one

> would expect that the majority of the content would be graphical. If

> so, then ZIPping the PDF files should not dramatically decrease their

> sizes. It would be interesting if the files decreased in size by a

> similar absolute amount. This would suggest that they had the same

> amount of text content.

>

> - Franc Zabkar

> --

> Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.